MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1853339616 · doi:10.1111/rssc.12124

A General Angular Regression Model for the Analysis of Data on Animal Movement in Ecology

2015· article· en· W1853339616 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Louis‐Paul Rivest, Thierry Duchesne, Aurélien Nicosia, Daniel Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsParks Canada
KeywordsEstimatorIdentifiabilityStatisticsCovarianceMathematicsRegressionVariance (accounting)Regression analysisDisplacement (psychology)Data setSet (abstract data type)EcologyEconometricsApplied mathematicsComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The paper investigates angular regressions that express the angles of an animal’s motion in terms of time varying directions and distances to environmental features that could influence its displacement. The mean direction proposed is a compromise between several possible targets. Conditions for the identifiability of the regression parameters are provided. Maximum likelihood estimators for the parameters are derived under two von Mises error structures. Robust sandwich estimators of the parameter variance–covariance matrix are obtained. The statistical methodology proposed is first used to reanalyse a classical data set on periwinkle movement. A second application investigates how bison trails are shaped by meadows and canopy gaps in Saskatchewan’s Prince Albert National Park.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics)Same topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207